https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373970 A seizure-based presumption under sections 132(4A) and 292C was treated as rebuttable and insufficient by itself to sustain an addition where the registered sale deed and agreement to sell supported the declared consideration, and the alleged higher-value receipt was unsigned and contradicted by other material. Because the Assessing Officer had not made adequate enquiry, including recording statements of persons connected with the receipt and transaction, the matter was restored for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing. en-us Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Jan 2019 07:38:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373970 A seizure-based presumption under sections 132(4A) and 292C was treated as rebuttable and insufficient by itself to sustain an addition where the registered sale deed and agreement to sell supported the declared consideration, and the alleged higher-value receipt was unsigned and contradicted by other material. Because the Assessing Officer had not made adequate enquiry, including recording statements of persons connected with the receipt and transaction, the matter was restored for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373970